Why Have We Stopped Looking Dangerous Going Forwards?

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I always believe we can score, and late goals have proved this. I believed we could get back into the game tonight until Hoolahan shot wide.

But we just don''t look as dangerous going forwards lately as we did up to a couple of months ago. Yes, our goals to chances ratio is good and this quality has helped us win games of late but I cannot recall a game of late when Norwich have created a succession of open chances, played good final balls, got in behind defences and put in killer crosses with regularity. Why is this?

We play positively in terms of application and seek to get forwards but I don''t see opposition defences under pressure or opposition goalkeepers making difficult saves.

What I see is us letting the opposition have the ball, think they can play it around against us and then a couple of clinical Norwich strikes ending the game but not the argument. Too many sides think they have played well against us and tonight a crap referee let such an opposition in early and we never recovered.

Hoolahan has stopped scoring and influencing the game where it really matters. He plays too deep.

Holt suffers without Martin who has tired (understandably) and the three amigo''s who bamboozled sides with their interplay have not done so for weeks.

Drury is key to our having a penetrating left side, but the right is noticably less effective in this respect and an effective diamond surely relies upon strong and forward running full backs.

The defence has generally sat too deep at home. Okay, this was a good tactic against Leeds but if it happens against Stockport I will be pretty unhappy.

I know it is the results that count and in this respect no one can criticise but, Norwich got where they are because of a 7/10 defence and a 9.5/10 attack. This attack has slipped to 7/10 or less.

Even tonight, we didn''t look especially dangerous. There were few of the attacking features I mentioned above and I know this Norwich side is capable of much more.

If we want to nail this promotion and title we need to get back to looking dangerous going forwards, and doing so throughout the game.

[Smudger 0]

Chris Martin and McNamee on the bench is not helping matters.

[Norwich or die tryin! 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Chris Martin and McNamee on the bench is not helping matters.[/quote]Both should have started today, and i said that before the match

[AJ 1,359]

[quote user="Askounin"][quote user="Smudger"]Chris Martin and McNamee on the bench is not helping matters.[/quote]Both should have started today, and i said that before the match[/quote]Totally agree, and after we went down to ten we needed to go out and attack. Martin coming on at half time was the correct decision, and you can''t blame him for waiting til the 75 minute mark (incase of injuries) to bring on McNamee, but the truth is, they both should have started. Especially in a game against a usually struggling bottom side with an awful pitch - we knew it wouldn''t suit Hoolahan''s game - and it didn''t.

[Smudger 0]

What is this all about?  Is nobody going to disagree with me???? [:|]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Smudger"]What is this all about?  Is nobody going to disagree with me???? [:|]
[/quote]Only Paul Lambert.........but what does he know? [:^)]

[morty 0]

I shall partially disagree with you Smudger, Macnamee still hasn''t shown me that he can do enough over 90 minutes.I think he should start tomorrow though.

[dylanisabaddog 6,143]

It has become harder in the 2nd half of the season when we are playing teams for the 2nd time.

Most teams seem to have worked out how to stop Hoolahan and the rest of the midfield are limited in ceativity.

 

[canaryjock 0]

I''ll disagree with you to a degree Smudger cos I thought Chris Martin was just as bad as Elliott when he came on.

[Boyo 0]

Like other people have said, I think we have looked more dangerous and created more chances when McNamee has been on.  His pace and dribbling skills have turned many defenders inside out and his delivery is mostly spot on.  I would like McNamee to play more and I would like to see us play 4-4-2 as well, with the flat midfield four of McNamee - Smith - Russel - Hoolahan/Lappin.  I know this really dosn''t suit Hoolahans game but we can''t always play the diamond just to suit him, I think Hoolahan could be worth selling in the summer because he can only play to his full potential in the diamond and the diamond isnt going to work in the Championship.

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Boyo"]I think Hoolahan could be worth selling in the summer.[/quote]Have you been out in the sun a bit too long, Boyo? Cos this has to be the most mental thing I''ve read on here in a long time... I''m talking Brendo or Nana levels of mental!  I''m not even going to bother arguing against it, though, because it speaks for itself.I''d also like to join in disagreeing with Smudger because I''ve still not seen McNamee to anywhere near enough to justify a start in place of either Hoolahan or Lappin (as much as you love him).  When he came on against Tranmere I was expecting him to use more of his supposed lightning pace to terrify the tiring defence, but he still really didn''t do anything to ignite us.  It was, of course, extremely hard at that stage, but if he was the God that some seem to think he is then he would have given us a spark.I did think we looked better with Martin on Friday and would start with him tomorrow - our front three just seem to click better when its Hoolahan, Holty and Martin... other players have come in and done well, but those three together just have that spark...

[Boyo 0]

Well Evil Monkey, the reason I think this is because I don''t think the diamond formation is going to work in the championship.  So if we played a 4-4-2 formation, or any other formation, it would mean Hoolahan would probably have to play on the left wing and as he proved in his first season here, he is no good there. 

To get the best out of Hoolahan he needs to play in the diamond (which I don''t think will work in the Champ) and if he is not playing in the diamond, he is not worht having.

When was his last game for us when he made evrything click?  For me it was Millwall on boxing day - a long time ago.

[O.T.B.C 1]

Don''t think that Wes will cut it in the Champ to be honest, like Boyo said, he needs to play this position and I don''t think we will have the personal to play that formation effectively. Don''t think he is strong enough for the wing too.

Selling him? No way for me, he still has that little bit of specialness that could change a game and even if he is a squad player, he can have that chance to change the game.

I hope he proves me wrong though.

[Lambert is King 0]

Short memory syndrome I reckon - our recent games scored 3 against Yeovil ( at a canter ) 3 against Huddersfield 1 against Swindon ( now second in league ) and 1 against Leeds when tatically we had a game plan purely to stop the opposition scoreing. And strangely quite hard to tear teams apart with ten men for 78 minutes although I am sure we would have with 11.

Paul Lambert is paid to bring us success not entertain us with free flowing open games. I am sure if we started losing games 6 - 5 instead of winning 1 - 0 you would be calling for Lamberts head. Our attack is obviously atroucious only 2 teams have scored more than us WBA and Chelsea, with Rochdale matching us on 79 ( league goals only ). Other than tatical reasons the only other common denominator is the dropping of Martin replacing him with Elliot.

As far as 442 goes it is very rare that this system is played by anyone actually with the ambition of success. Strangely enough when 2 players are marking Hoolahan 1 of them aint marking somebody else. They are also not joining in opposition attacking moves because they are sticking not far from him. As for selling Hoolahan I see as I have mentioned many times that happening to part finance the players Lambert will want to bring in, however were you not begging the club not to sell him in January as that would be the end of our promotion ambitions ? likewise Martin ? 

[Depraved 0]

I agree mostly with you LiK, once we got settle with our "10" men we dominated most of the game. The only time Tranmere looked dangerous was on the break and again it was because of the extra man they had. We were unlucky not to go in at half time 3-2, but thats football. To say we no longer look dangerous going forward is in my view is absolute nonsence.

Expect a few goals tomorrow.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I am happy with the different opinions and have enjoyed reading them.

The debate about Hoolahan is interesting too. I love watching Wes and he works hard but I do have concerns about the diamond in the Championship and Wes''s ability to be an effective part of another system.

I hope Lambert can perform some alchemy because Wes is a magician and the game desperately needs proper players rather than just tall athletes.

I also hope the team goes out and looks lethal in attack on Easter Monday and bangs in some goals.

[Lambert is King 0]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]I am happy with the different opinions and have enjoyed reading them. The debate about Hoolahan is interesting too. I love watching Wes and he works hard but I do have concerns about the diamond in the Championship and Wes''s ability to be an effective part of another system. I hope Lambert can perform some alchemy because Wes is a magician and the game desperately needs proper players rather than just tall athletes. I also hope the team goes out and looks lethal in attack on Easter Monday and bangs in some goals.[/quote]

Your point is correct as I thought Lambert changed to the diamond to accomodate Wes more by luck than judgement,as we were just not breaking teams down Walsall at home being a prime example. The system was changed during the Orient game Hoolahan brought on with the score still at 0 - 0 and looking to be another Walsall. Game changed ( we won 4 - 0 ) diamond kept with amazing success. In the last couple of seasons however the teams that have become successfull have used the diamond or a similar 4 3 3 often looking like there is 1 upfront. Maybe we are looking at 4 4 2 as that is what we are used to. Norwich are similar to lots of clubs now selecting tall powerfull athletes for the academy that then fit into modern systems. Only time will tell as to what Lambert intends doing next year, but like yourself it would not shock me to see Hoolihan sold to raise funds for a particlar type of player - even more so if we went 4 4 2. 

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="Lambert is King"]The system was changed during the Orient game Hoolahan brought on with the score still at 0 - 0 and looking to be another Walsall.[/quote]No, it was Martin who came on for McVeigh in that game.  Hoolahan played the full ninety minutes and we pretty much dominated that game even at 0-0 anyway, it was totally different to Walsall.

[Mr_Chimp 0]

And we complain about fans of the ''Sky 4'' suffering from knee-jerkism.Get a grip guys.  We''re still top scorers in this league by a million miles.  We have the most potent attack we''ve had for some time.  So we lost.  Oh no.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Boyo"]I think Hoolahan could be worth selling in the summer.[/quote]Have you been out in the sun a bit too long, Boyo? Cos this has to be the most mental thing I''ve read on here in a long time... I''m talking Brendo or Nana levels of mental!  I''m not even going to bother arguing against it, though, because it speaks for itself.I''d also like to join in disagreeing with Smudger because I''ve still not seen McNamee to anywhere near enough to justify a start in place of either Hoolahan or Lappin (as much as you love him).  When he came on against Tranmere I was expecting him to use more of his supposed lightning pace to terrify the tiring defence, but he still really didn''t do anything to ignite us.  It was, of course, extremely hard at that stage, but if he was the God that some seem to think he is then he would have given us a spark.I did think we looked better with Martin on Friday and would start with him tomorrow - our front three just seem to click better when its Hoolahan, Holty and Martin... other players have come in and done well, but those three together just have that spark...[/quote]McNamee''s game is about much more than lightening pace EM.  He has superb delivery in to the box for a player at this level.  He set up a great chance which Hoolahan fluffed on Friday night and even with 10 men Tranmere''s defence started to sit much deeper.With regards to Martin over Elliot... when we have started Eliiot the ball has not stuck upfront at all and comes back to us far too easily.  I know that will be one in the eye for those who reckon Chris Martin is lazy but that is what we have witnessed on both Friday night and at home to Leeds.

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Boyo"]I think Hoolahan could be worth selling in the summer.[/quote]Have you been out in the sun a bit too long, Boyo? Cos this has to be the most mental thing I''ve read on here in a long time... I''m talking Brendo or Nana levels of mental!  I''m not even going to bother arguing against it, though, because it speaks for itself.I''d also like to join in disagreeing with Smudger because I''ve still not seen McNamee to anywhere near enough to justify a start in place of either Hoolahan or Lappin (as much as you love him).  When he came on against Tranmere I was expecting him to use more of his supposed lightning pace to terrify the tiring defence, but he still really didn''t do anything to ignite us.  It was, of course, extremely hard at that stage, but if he was the God that some seem to think he is then he would have given us a spark.I did think we looked better with Martin on Friday and would start with him tomorrow - our front three just seem to click better when its Hoolahan, Holty and Martin... other players have come in and done well, but those three together just have that spark...[/quote]McNamee''s game is about much more than lightening pace EM.  He has superb delivery in to the box for a player at this level.  He set up a great chance which Hoolahan fluffed on Friday night and even with 10 men Tranmere''s defence started to sit much deeper.With regards to Martin over Elliot... when we have started Eliiot the ball has not stuck upfront at all and comes back to us far too easily.  I know that will be one in the eye for those who reckon Chris Martin is lazy but that is what we have witnessed on both Friday night and at home to Leeds.[/quote]Certainly agree about Martin over Elliott, expecting him to start today! [Y]

[Smudger 0]

Me too EM.... but maybe Martin has been tired and maybe Lambert knows best.If Martin starts today then maybe Elliot will come off the bench and grab a couple of goals.  I think that Chris Martin has a superb all round game for such a young striker though/It is right what  a couple of posters say on page 1 of this thread, we can''t really grumble can we?  Lambert has performed near miracles with the squad in his short time here so far, but being fans we can still question.  When we just follow and stop questioning is when we run in to trouble as a club.Long may Lambert continue doing it his own way and being a success, that''s what we pay him for.  The managerial hot seat will become hotter next season, but how nice it is to see a manager of ours finally look comfortable instead of on edge sitting there.